InternetNews.com states: "Microsoft (or a really smart ISV) should build a full application manager for Windows, similar to what most Linux distributions do today." Most Windows applications come with their own distinctive updating mechanism (much like Mac OS X), instead of having a centralised updating location like most Linux distributions offer. While it certainly wouldn't be harmful for Windows to gain such a feature - the question remains: isn't it time we rethink program installation and management altogether?

On Windows, application don't ask you for upgrade each time you launch it, but each time there was an upgrade.

Mature applications aren't upgraded that often, so this is not the big issue that the author wanted to point out.
That said, on XP Microsoft upgrade process suck ass, yes I installed a fix and no I don't want to reboot now, I don't need to be nagged repeatedly!!

On Windows, application don't ask you for upgrade each time you launch it, but each time there was an upgrade.

That was an exageration for the situation in Windows, it is true. The Windows scenario is poor enough without the need to exagerate it.

However, if you want an example of bias, look at what was claimed for Linux:

Linux users claim to have the holy grail of application management, but they're also wrong. Yes, they have this elegant central updating and management utility, but in return, you are limited by how up-to-date your distributor is keeping its repositories - or how much stuff they put in there. It's quite annoying to know that a new version of Pidgin is out, but your distributor hasn't packaged it yet. On top of that, these central updating mechanisms in Linux are - still - notorious for making a mess out of things during more complicated update sets.

My goodness! How inaccurate and biased can one get?

Examples: "you are limited by how up-to-date your distributor is keeping its repositories - or how much stuff they put in there"

Consider that this is the equivalent of the ONLY method of installing software on Windows or a Mac, why utterly ignore the fact that a similar method applies to Linux? If one uses gedbi or equivalent GUI to install such a downloaded package, or one uses dpkg or equivalent from the command line to do the same, then the same "uninstall" methods are applicable as packages loaded from the repositories (caveat: keep in mind that update notifiers wont work for packages installed outside of the repositories).

BTW: the google search that Thom included as evidence that package managers make a "mess" shows up hits from years ago. Personally ... I've never hit a snag that couldn't be resolved fairly easily.